Urban Building Energy Performance Prediction and Retrofit Analysis Using Data-Driven Machine Learning Approach - ScienceDirect

Urban building energy performance prediction and retrofit analysis using data-driven machine learning approach - ScienceDirect 01.12.
01.12.23, 20:02
Energy and Buildings

Volume 303, 15 January 2024, 113768
Urban building energy performance prediction and

retrofit analysis using data-driven machine learning
approach
Usman Ali a , Sobia Bano a , Mohammad Haris Shamsi d , Divyanshu Sood a , Cathal Hoare a ,
c , Neil Hewitt b , James O'Donnell a
Wangda Zuo
Show more
Outline Share Cite
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2023.113768
Get rights and content
Under a Creative Commons license open access
Highlights
• Utilization of ensemble-based machine learning modeling.
• Implementation of an end-use demand segregation.
• Identification of key building features for each end-use demand prediction.
• Analysis of the impact of retrofit measures using future weather data.
Abstract
Stakeholders such as urban planners and energy policymakers use building energy performance modeling
and analysis to develop strategic sustainable energy plans with the aim of reducing energy consumption
and emissions from the built environment. However, inconsistent energy data and the lack of scalable
building models create a gap between building energy modeling and traditional planning practices. An
alternative approach is to conduct a large-scale energy usage survey, which is time-consuming. Similarly,
existing studies rely on traditional machine learning or statistical approaches for calculating large-scale
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378778823009982?via%3Dihub#se0010 Page 1 of 38
Urban building energy performance prediction and retrofit analysis using data-driven machine learning approach - ScienceDirect 01.12.23, 20:02
energy performance. This paper proposes a solution that employs a data-driven machine learning approach
to predict the energy performance of urban residential buildings, using both ensemble-based machine
learning and end-use demand segregation methods. The proposed methodology consists of five steps: data
collection, archetype development, physics-based parametric modeling, machine learning modeling, and
urban building energy performance analysis. The devised methodology is tested on the Irish residential
building stock and generates a synthetic building dataset of one million buildings through the parametric
modeling of 19 identified vital variables for four residential building archetypes. As a part of the machine
learning modeling process, the study implemented an end-use demand segregation method, including
heating, lighting, equipment, photovoltaic, and hot water, to predict the energy performance of buildings at
an urban scale. Furthermore, the model's performance is enhanced by employing an ensemble-based
machine learning approach, achieving 91% accuracy compared to the traditional approach's 76%. Accurate
prediction of building energy performance enables stakeholders, including energy policymakers and urban
planners, to make informed decisions when planning large-scale retrofit measures.
Previous Next
Keywords
Building energy performance; Data-driven approaches; Urban building energy modeling; Machine learning;
Building retrofit
Nomenclature
BEM
Building Energy Modeling
Building Energy Performance Simulator
BER
Building Energy Rating
CEA
City Energy Analyst
City Building Energy Saver
CSO
Central Statistics Office
Dwelling Energy Assessment Procedure
DT
Decision Tree
European Union Energy Performance of Buildings Directive
EPC
Energy Performance Certificate
GB
Gradient Boosting
HGB
Histogram-Based Gradient Boosting
Heating Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
KNN
K-Nearest Neighbor
Light Gradient Boosted Machine
LR
Linear Regression
NN
Neural Network
RF
Random Forest
Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland
SVR
Support Vector Regression
Urban Building Energy Modeling
UMI
Urban Modeling Interface
XGB
Extreme Gradient Boosting
1. Introduction
The operation of buildings accounted for 30% of global energy consumption and 27% of total energy sector
greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) in 2021 [1]. Within this context, 8% comprised direct emissions occurring
within buildings, while 19% represented indirect emissions resulting from the production of electricity and
heat used in buildings. To address these environmental concerns, the member nations of the European
Union (EU) have established a legislative infrastructure to advance sustainable strategic planning initiatives
and strengthen energy efficiency within the building sector using the Energy Performance of Buildings
Directive (EPBD). The primary objective of this directive is to facilitate the adoption of policies and measures
that will enable the achievement of a highly energy-efficient and decarbonized building stock by the years
2030 and 2050, respectively [2].
The rise in annual energy consumption, especially in urban areas, is expected to increase carbon emissions
significantly [1]. As a result, there is a growing focus on reducing energy use and emissions from the
building sector. Urban planners and policymakers are exploring innovative strategies to make existing
buildings more sustainable, including creating comprehensive sustainable energy plans. Furthermore, long-
term renovation strategies are necessary to achieve a higher level of sustainability and reduce carbon
emissions from buildings. These plans aim to minimize overall energy consumption and CO2 emissions by
analyzing data on the energy performance of buildings on a large scale. As a result, the EU has implemented
the aforementioned EPBD to ensure that member states develop the buildings database comprising Energy
Performance Certificates (EPCs). However, even with this mandate, building stock databases typically cover
only 30-50% of the total building stock [3].
Moreover, available data are often inadequate for stakeholders such as urban planners, energy policymakers,
utility planners, and manufacturers to create effective and sustainable energy conservation measures.
Gathering accurate and comprehensive data for urban modeling poses a significant challenge [4]. The
limited availability and accessibility of data at the urban scale make it difficult to understand the urban
context thoroughly. This poses a hurdle for researchers and practitioners who aim to develop accurate and
reliable models that capture the complexities of urban systems. Overcoming this issue requires innovative
approaches and collaborations to improve data collection and sharing mechanisms, ensuring a more
comprehensive and representative urban modeling and analysis. Similarly, estimating the energy
performance of the entire building stock is challenging due to numerous factors that impact energy usage,
including the building envelope, the geometry of buildings, the behavior of occupants, heating and cooling
systems, and the weather conditions [5], [6].
Generally, there are two main approaches to estimating building energy performance: physical and data-
driven models [7]. Physical models are based on detailed building physics and are analyzed using simulation
tools such as EnergyPlus, ESP-r, and TRNSYS [5]. The simulation of these tools requires extensive building
characteristics, including geometric and non-geometric information [6]. On the other hand, the data-driven
approach predicts energy usage based on historical data, employing statistical or machine learning
algorithms [8]. Unlike the physical modeling approach, this method does not require a deep understanding
of the building. This approach has gained significant popularity in the building energy sector because it
allows prediction and estimation of energy consumption with limited building information [6]. Similarly,
data-driven models can uncover complex relationships between various characteristics of buildings and
energy consumption, which can be challenging to identify using traditional methods.
In recent years, researchers implemented various data-driven approaches in building energy demand
prediction. These approaches use historical data and employ statistical and machine learning (ML)
algorithms to develop data-driven models [6], [9], [10], [11], [12]. Machine learning algorithms can be
broadly classified into supervised and unsupervised learning techniques, with supervised learning further
divided into regression and classification algorithms [13]. Supervised learning algorithms commonly used in
building energy demand prediction include a nearest neighbor, naive Bayes, rule induction, deep learning,
Support Vector Machines (SVM), and neural networks [14], [15], [13]. On the other hand, unsupervised
learning techniques are applied without any corresponding output variable for inputs [14]. Unsupervised
learning algorithms commonly implemented in this domain include clustering and association rules of k
means [16], [11]. However, previous studies employing the data-driven methodology primarily concentrated
on forecasting the energy consumption of individual buildings [17]. This limited focus is mainly due to the
need for more high-quality and reliable data on a large scale. In addition, these studies have relied on only a
few parameters to forecast the potential energy consumption of the building [18].
The novelty of this research lies in the integration of parametric simulations, ensemble-based machine
learning approaches, and segregation methods to predict building energy performance at an urban scale
using limited resources. Parametric simulation techniques can create synthetic data encompassing a wide
range of relevant scenarios for stakeholders. This study implements ensemble-based machine learning
algorithms to predict building energy performance on an urban scale by segregating end-use demands such
as electricity, hot water, and heating. Furthermore, this research identifies the key building characteristics
for each end-use demand prediction. The research additionally analyses the impact of retrofit measures and
future stakeholder policies using historical and future weather data.
This paper is structured as follows. Section 2 describes an overview of the existing work done on the
prediction of the energy performance of urban buildings. Section 3 outlines the methodology devised,
including an explanation of the steps followed in the development of the machine learning model. The
results of the Irish case study are presented in Section 4, followed by discussions of possible implications
and improvements in the case study in Section 5. Section 6 includes conclusions and potential challenges,
and future work.
2. Literature review
Urban building energy modeling can effectively analyze building energy performance and facilitate
sustainable energy planning. The most common modeling approaches, such as physics-based or data-driven
approaches, differ based on implementation and data requirements, as described in the following sections.
2.1. Physics-based urban building energy modeling

The physics-based urban building energy modeling approach also referred to as the engineering or
simulation approach, uses simulation techniques along with data related to building characteristics,
construction, weather conditions, and data from heating-cooling systems to compute the consumption of
end-use energy [19], [20]. The physics-based approach can simulate and estimate building energy usage or
production on site, incorporating renewable energy technologies [13]. These models determine the end-use
energy consumption of each building by type and rating using measurable data [7].
In the context of cities, the bottom-up archetype method has been widely used to analyze the overall
impact of energy efficiency strategies and new technologies at a regional or national scale [5], [21]. Each
building archetype is modeled in the simulation engine to estimate energy consumption, with these
estimates then scaled up to represent the regional or national building stock [22]. These approaches heavily
rely on quantitative data obtained from building physics. These methods require various inputs, such as the
thermal properties (U values) of the building components (walls, windows, roof, floor, doors), internal and
external temperatures, heating system patterns, ventilation rates, appliance quantities, occupancy,
schedules, and internal loads [7], [6]. In addition, these models require numerous assumptions to establish
the behavior of the occupants and a substantial amount of technical data to estimate energy consumption.
One of the most prominent projects, the City Building Energy Saver (CityBES), offers a platform for modeling
and analyzing the thermal performance of different retrofit scenarios [23]. CityBES uses the EnergyPlus
simulation engine to model buildings and analyze retrofit at the district or city scale [24]. Another project,
The CitySim project, involves a decision support tool that assists energy planners and stakeholders in
minimizing energy usage and emissions while incorporating various optimization and retrofit analyses [25].
Urban Modeling Interface (UMI) integrates the EnergyPlus simulation engines, Daysim, and a Python
module for the operational energy, daylighting, and walkability of urban buildings [26]. MIT's UBEM (Urban
Building Energy Model) platform uses the EnergyPlus simulation engine to model approximately 83,541
buildings by integrating official GIS datasets and a custom building archetype library [27]. URBANopt (Urban
Renewable Building And Neighborhood Optimization) provides an EnergyPlus and OpenStudio-based
simulation software development kit (SDK) to simulate the energy performance of low-energy districts and
campus-scale thermal and electrical analyses [28].
One of the significant challenges in modeling at an urban scale is the availability of both building geometric
and non-geometric data. Few recent studies have focused on the generation of new building geometric data.
UBEM.io, a novel web-based framework, automates the generation of urban-scale building geometries
based on widely available inputs such as shapefiles, LiDAR, and tax assessor data [29]. Soroush et al.
developed a detailed urban building energy model using the CityGML format for 3D urban geometry and
employed spatial joining to incorporate the features required for archetype selection [30]. Ali et al. proposed
urban building energy and microclimate modeling by generating 3D city models from sources such as
Google Earth, Microsoft Footprints, and OpenStreetMap [31]. Irene et al. developed a modeling framework
to assess the potential of creating energy communities by combining UBEM capabilities with the rooftops'
potential for solar generation [32].
With increased data availability and more sophisticated modeling techniques, it has become crucial to
devise a generalized UBEM framework and improve the existing work to facilitate the modeling and analysis
of different use cases. Previous studies provide a limited view of the different building energy aspects in an
urban setting. This stems mainly from the fact that simulating each building individually, along with their
interdependencies, requires significant time and resources [33]. Furthermore, these methods usually deploy
a physics-based simulation engine, which can be computationally demanding and time-consuming due to
the intricate nature of urban systems”.
Data-driven urban building energy modeling can address the aforementioned challenges by estimating
building energy consumption using basic knowledge of the buildings' features. However, this approach still
has research gaps, as discussed in the next section.
2.2. Data-driven urban building energy modeling

In urban energy modeling, a data-driven approach can predict and assess buildings' energy usage by
considering various factors related to the characteristics of the buildings [7], [19]. This approach is based on
the analysis of existing data sources that include building stock datasets, billing data (such as electricity and
gas consumption), survey data, and socioeconomic variables [7]. Data-driven urban energy modeling is
conducted mainly using machine learning and statistical approaches. Recent studies on urban energy have
increasingly focused on using machine learning algorithms over traditional statistical techniques [7].
Rahman et al. used deep recurrent neural networks to predict medium- to long-term electricity use in
commercial and residential buildings [34]. Meanwhile, Kontokosta and Tull devised statistical models to
determine the energy consumption of electricity and natural gas in more than a million buildings in New
York City [35]. Feifeng et al. proposed a semi-supervised learning method for predicting energy use
intensity (EUI) using 34,456 unlabeled samples [36]. Zhang et al. proposed a data-driven framework for the
prediction of energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions, which considered various factors such as building
characteristics, geometry and urban morphology [37]. Similarly, Seo et al. developed a data-driven model to
predict the energy demand for heating of 10,000 low-income households in South Korea [38]. Razak et al.
developed a machine learning model that forecasts annual average energy use based on building design
features in the initial development stages [18]. Ngo et al. used ensemble machine learning models to
forecast building energy consumption over 24 hours [39]. Lastly, Wurm et al. developed a workflow for
modeling the heat demand of building stock on an urban scale, using deep learning algorithms [40].
Although a significant amount of research has been conducted on predicting energy consumption in
individual buildings using their specific characteristics, more studies have yet to explore using data-driven
models for predicting energy consumption on a larger scale. The main challenge lies in the lack of high-
quality data in sufficient quantities to train prediction models effectively. This underscores the need for a
robust building energy modeling approach capable of accurately predicting the energy performance of
entire building stocks, even when faced with limited resources for complex decision-making analysis.
Furthermore, previous research on predicting building energy consumption has been limited by considering
only a small set of parameters ([18]). Fewer recent studies have started incorporating crucial factors such as
U-values, HVAC systems, and renewable energy systems into their machine-learning algorithms to estimate
better energy performance in buildings ([37]). However, only a few studies have specifically investigated the
impact of parameters such as U values, HVAC system types, and the presence of renewable energy systems
on the estimation of the energy performance of buildings using machine learning algorithms ([18], [39],
[40], [41]).
Predicting the energy performance of buildings at an urban scale poses a significant challenge for urban
planners and policymakers. The accurate prediction of energy consumption and the identification of
opportunities for enhancing energy efficiency are crucial for fostering sustainable development in cities.
There is significant potential to expand current research and establish a comprehensive methodology for
data-driven building energy modeling on an urban level.
However, one major issue that arises in an urban context is the availability of data. Obtaining
comprehensive and reliable data at an urban scale can be challenging, as it requires collecting and
integrating information from multiple sources [4]. Addressing this issue is essential to enable effective
energy planning and modeling techniques, empowering stakeholders to make informed decisions and drive
positive change in urban energy management.
These findings highlight the importance of adopting a holistic approach to building energy modeling,
considering all relevant factors, to accurately predict building energy performance and align with the
objectives of various stakeholders. Therefore, this research proposes a methodology that combines and
harnesses the strengths of physics-based and data-driven approaches to accurately predict the energy
performance of buildings on an urban scale. In the physics-based approach, parametric simulation methods
are employed to generate synthetic data that encompass all possible scenarios relevant to stakeholders.
Similarly, ensemble machine learning and end-use demand segregation methods are used in the data-
driven approach instead of relying on a single model to achieve accurate predictions of building energy
performance on an urban scale.
3. Methodology
This study proposes a novel methodology that uses supervised machine learning algorithms to predict
building energy performance on a large scale. This research aims to identify the most effective model using
physics and data-driven approaches. The prediction methodology for the energy performance of urban
buildings involves five steps (Fig. 1).
1. The initial step involves collecting data from various sources such as building stock, census, weather, and
geographical data.
2. The next step involves developing building archetypes using existing building stock data to identify
representative baseline models.
3. The subsequent step focuses on parametric simulation to develop appropriate synthetic data.
4. The step of developing machine learning models predicts building energy performance on a large scale
using an ensemble or segregation method.
5. Finally, the urban building energy performance analysis step analyzes the modeling process results for
planning and decision-making purposes.
Download : Download high-res image (180KB)

Download : Download full-size image
Fig. 1. Overarching methodology for urban building energy performance prediction using machine learning.
3.1. Data collection

The data collection process involves gathering various inputs for urban building energy performance
prediction using machine learning, including building stock data, weather information, census data, reports
on energy policies, and construction data [5].
The building stock data are necessary for conducting physics-based simulations that encompass buildings'
geometry and non-geometry data. This includes data such as building envelope specifications, shapes,
number of floors, type of building, geometry, geographical position, and window opening ratios ([42]).
Typically, the geometric data required for building energy modeling is gathered from building stock and
energy performance certificate databases and existing construction databases such as TABULA, EPISCOPE,
and building typology databases ([43]).
Along with geometric data, non-geometric data are also required for modelings, such as user occupancy
patterns, equipment loads, HVAC systems, and usage patterns also need to be modeled. One of the
significant challenges in this regard is the availability of non-geometric building information on a large
scale. Non-geometric building data can be obtained through the building archetypes approach, using
available national census databases, statistical surveys, and energy performance certificate data.
Weather data sets are essential to accurately model energy use in building thermal simulations ([44]). The
most commonly used climate data sets, such as the typical meteorological year data (TMY), have been
available for a long time and describe the local climate ([45]). Another helpful resource are EnergyPlus
Weather format (EPW) files, which can be accessed online for more than 3,034 locations. These files are
arranged by region and country of the World Meteorological Organization. Furthermore, this study
incorporates future weather files to assess the impact of weather conditions on retrofit measures under
various climate scenarios, aiming to achieve the energy policy targets set by policymakers, such as those for
2030 or 2050. The sources of these future weather files can vary, including resources like Meteonorm,
WeatherShift, and CCWorldWeatherGen [46].
Similarly, the modeling process relies on additional sources such as census data, reports on energy policies,
and construction data. These sources offer valuable insights into demographic patterns, energy
consumption trends, and infrastructure development, facilitating a more comprehensive analysis and
meeting the requirements of urban systems.
3.2. Building archetypes development

Several buildings on an urban scale often share similar characteristics and can be classified into building
archetypes. In the context of urban building energy simulation, a building archetype, referred to as a
reference building, is a representative model that captures the typical characteristics and performance of a
specific category or group of buildings within a large building stock. The parametric simulation framework
uses each building archetype as a baseline model. These data can be sourced from established national
building stock databases, such as the TABULA or EPC databases [43]. Building archetypes or reference
buildings serve as standardized models that simplify the simulation process by providing a baseline or
template for analysis. They are typically developed based on existing data collection, statistical analysis, and
empirical studies of buildings within the target building stock. Moreover, simulating any building archetype
requires geometric and non-geometric data for each baseline model. These building archetypes are the
starting point for parametric modeling of different buildings to develop a synthetic stock.
3.3. Parametric simulation

Parametric simulation provides an optimal solution, mainly when only sparse data sets are available for
energy modeling. To execute complex parametric simulations involving multiple parameters, a parametric
tool is used to perform numerous simulations using a Building Energy Performance Simulator (BEPS) model
([47]). This study uses jEPlus as a parametric tool for energy simulations. Furthermore, jEPlus uses
EnergyPlus for simulation and incorporates DesignBuilder construction templates to integrate diverse
parameter values. Parametric simulation using EnergyPlus presents a robust approach to assess the energy
performance of buildings and investigate various design alternatives. In the parametric simulation,
EnergyPlus facilitates a systematic exploration of the design parameters, providing insights into their
impact on energy consumption, comfort, and other performance metrics.
The selection of parametric features plays a crucial role in developing parametric simulation-based models
and generating synthetic datasets. The accuracy of the building energy model is highly dependent on the
careful selection of each parameter in this process. These parameter values, which encompass the necessary
variations for synthetic data generation, can be obtained from literature surveys that are specific to the
relevant climate environments ([48], [3]).
In the parametric simulation process, various essential parameters are commonly used that include
construction characteristics such as walls, windows, floors, roofs, internal gains, occupancy density, and
heating or cooling systems. They all contribute to the overall energy performance assessment and are
integral to the parametric simulation. By considering these parameters and their variations, parametric
simulation enables the exploration of different design alternatives and their impact on energy consumption,
comfort levels, and other performance metrics. It allows for a comprehensive evaluation of the energy
efficiency of the building and helps to make decisions about design optimizations. Therefore, selecting the
appropriate parameters and their values, based on literature surveys and specific climate environments, is
crucial to create accurate and representative synthetic datasets and ensuring the reliability of parametric
simulation-based models.
However, dealing with the complexity of many parameters makes it nearly impossible to generate
simulated data for all possible combinations. Sampling methods such as Simple Random Sampling (SRS)
and Latin Hypercube Sampling (LHS) are used to generate synthetic data to address this challenge ([49],
[50]). Simple Random Sampling (SRS) is a straightforward method in which each sample is randomly and
independently selected from the population. On the other hand, Latin Hypercube Sampling (LHS) is a more
advanced sampling method that aims to achieve a more uniform distribution of samples across the entire
range of the data. LHS ensures that each parameter value combination is balanced, allowing for a more
comprehensive design space exploration. These methods allow for generating representative synthetic
datasets encompassing a range of parameter combinations, facilitating a more comprehensive analysis of
design alternatives and optimizing energy modeling outcomes.
3.4. Machine learning modeling

This process involves formulating machine learning models to estimate the building energy performance
(Fig. 2). Synthetic building stock data, generated from the parametric simulation step, is intended to serve as
input for the development of machine learning models.

Fig. 2. Process of machine learning modeling to predict Energy Use Intensity (EUI) using machine learning
models.
3.4.1. Data preprocessing

The process begins with data preprocessing, during which inconsistencies within the dataset are identified
and eliminated before the data are used for further analysis and model development.
3.4.2. Data splitting

The pre-processed data is divided into two subsets to ensure optimal training of the model: a training
dataset used for training the model and a test dataset for evaluating the performance of the trained model.
Two standard techniques for data splitting are random data splitting and cross-validation.
Random data splitting is a straightforward method in which data is randomly divided into training and
testing datasets, typically in an 80-20% split ratio. However, this method may cause problems with uneven
data distribution, and an incorrect selection of training and testing datasets can also adversely affect the
machine learning model's performance [51]. On the other hand, cross-validation is a more sophisticated
method that is often used to strike a balance between minimal bias and variance in the trained model. This
study adopts the k-fold cross-validation algorithm for data splitting to prevent overfitting or underfitting
the model.
3.4.3. Non-segregation models development

This paper implements and compares three different machine learning model approaches to predict
building energy performance, namely: the single model approach, end-use demand segregation method,
and ensemble-based segregation method. In the single model approach, also referred to as the “non-
segregation” method, this study conducts a comparative analysis of various machine learning algorithms,
assessing their predictive accuracy, efficiency, and suitability for building energy performance modeling.
Over recent years, machine learning models have garnered considerable attention in data-driven modeling.
Among the most frequently used models are Linear Regression (LR), Neural Network (NN), Decision Tree
(DT), Random Forest (RF), K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), Gradient Boosting (GB) and Support Vector Regression
(SVR) [7]. Some of the popular implementations of gradient boosting include XGBoost (Extreme Gradient
Boosting), Histogram-Based Gradient Boosting (HGB), and LGBM (Light Gradient Boosted Machine). These
algorithms have demonstrated exceptional performance in energy forecasting and prediction, particularly in
the context of energy modeling, due to their extensive use and success in previous studies ([17], [11]). By
assessing the effectiveness of these models, this study aims to discern the most efficient approach to predict
building energy performance using machine learning techniques.
3.4.4. End-use demand segregation models development

End-use demand segregation methods use different machine learning models to predict each end-use
demand. This strategy diverges from the traditional approach of employing a single machine-learning
model. This modification aims to achieve superior predictive performance (Fig. 3). The workflow includes
developing distinct regression machine learning models for each end-use demand, such as heating, cooling,
lighting, and hot water. The predictions of these end-use demands are aggregated to calculate the final
energy performance of the building, measured in terms of Energy Use Intensity (EUI). The prediction for
each end-use demand is multiplied by its corresponding primary energy factor. The resulting values for
heating, cooling, equipment, lighting, and hot water are then aggregated and photovoltaic energy
generation is deducted from them to calculate the total energy consumption of the building. This
cumulative total is then divided by the building area to calculate the Energy Use Intensity (EUI), a measure
of the energy performance of the building as defined in Equation (1). Finally, the EUI is classified into an
Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) label or rating,
(1)
where , , , , , and represent the energy consumption (or

generation for for each respective category in kilowatt hours per year (kW h/year). ,
, , , , and are the primary energy factors (PEFs) for
each respective category. represents the total floor area of the building in square meters (m2).

Fig. 3. Methodology for end-use demand segregation modeling to predict Energy Use Intensity (EUI) using
machine learning.
3.4.5. Ensemble and segregation models development

The workflow further implements ensemble machine learning methods to test multiple learning algorithms
and obtain better predictive performance. Ensemble techniques are commonly used in machine learning to
enhance model accuracy by mitigating overfitting and increasing generalizability. By leveraging the
complementary strengths of multiple models, ensemble learning provides more stable predictions and
improves accuracy compared to the conventional approach of using a single model. There are two main
ensemble learning techniques that differ mainly by kind of model, data sampling, and decision function.
Therefore, ensemble learning techniques can be classified as stacking and voting techniques.
The stacking method, also known as stacking generalization, was introduced by Wolpert [52]. The goal is to
reduce the generalization error of different machine learning models. The final Meta-Model comprises the
predictions of an “n” number of machine learning-based models through the k-fold cross-validation
technique. On the other hand, the voting ensemble method is one of the most intuitive and easy to
understand. The voting ensemble method comprises a number “n” of machine learning models, and the
final prediction is the one with “the most votes” or the highest weighted and averaged probability.
Generally, ensemble learning techniques use multiple best-prediction performance machine learning
models. The study implements a stacking-based ensemble method to predict each end-use demand,
enhancing model accuracy and predicting building energy performance. This method combines predictions
from multiple models by training another model to consolidate its output, often resulting in more accurate
and robust predictions compared to the voting ensemble method (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4. Methodology for ensemble machine learning modeling approach for enhanced predictive
performance in machine learning models.
3.4.6. Models performance

To evaluate the effectiveness of machine learning models, commonly used performance indices such as R-
Squared ( ), Mean Absolute Error (MAE), and Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) are employed ([7], [11]). A
model with the lowest RMSE and MAE values and a value nearest to 1 is deemed superior among all
models. Finally, in order to assess the model's accuracy, the predicted value of EUI (expressed in
kW h/(m2*year)) is transformed into an Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) label or rating. Furthermore,
precision and recall are crucial metrics used for a detailed analysis of each class. Precision assesses the
accuracy of positive predictions made by the model, whereas recall quantifies the model's capability to
detect all positive instances within the dataset [3].
3.4.7. End-use features extraction

The final step of this process is to find the importance of features for each end-use demand using the
developed machine learning model. Feature importance refers to the determination of the relevance or
contribution of individual features in a machine learning model to make accurate predictions. It helps in
understanding which features have the most significant impact on the model's predictions.
One popular method for calculating feature importance is SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations). SHAP
values provide a unified measure of feature importance by considering the contribution of each feature
value to the prediction for a specific instance while also accounting for interactions between features. By
using SHAP values, we can gain insight into which features impact the model's predictions the most. This
information can be valuable for understanding the underlying relationships in the data and identifying the
key drivers or factors that influence the target variable.
3.5. Urban building energy performance analysis

In the final phase of the methodology, the developed machine learning model predicts the energy
performance of the entire building stock. The availability of comprehensive building stock data can help
stakeholders analyze the building stock at an urban scale and successfully implement sustainable energy
policies. Furthermore, the developed model can be applied to practical application scenarios, such as
implementing and evaluating proposed retrofit measures as part of national-level policy decisions. These
measures, often proposed at the national level, aim to improve the energy performance of existing buildings
through modifications and improvements. For example, this could include installing heat pumps or
integrating renewable energy systems like solar panels. The proposed models can evaluate their impact
before implementation and identify potential energy savings. This predictive capability reduces the risk of
implementing ineffective or inefficient measures, ensuring that resources are used optimally. It also helps
fine-tune such measures to fit better the specific needs and constraints of the building stock.
In general, the developed model offers a holistic approach to urban-scale energy management and policy
implementation, creating a more sustainable built environment. Using modeling outcomes, stakeholders
can navigate the complexities of urban building stock analysis and energy policy implementation, even
without extensive knowledge of building dynamics. This empowers policymakers and stakeholders alike to
make informed decisions when retrofitting existing building stock to improve energy efficiency and
mitigate environmental impact.
4. Case study
The primary objective of this case study is to test the proposed methodology by calculating the energy
performance of Ireland's residential building stock. This methodology seamlessly integrates a data-driven
approach with parametric simulation modeling to predict the energy performance of buildings on an urban
scale. This case study follows the same structure as the proposed methodology discussed in the previous
section, with subsequent subsections following the same order.
4.1. Data collection

Collecting urban-scale building stock data is challenging as individual building information is often
unavailable [4]. The data collection process involves acquiring raw building data from various sources to
implement the proposed methodology, including building stock datasets, building census datasets, weather
data, and data from energy policymakers' reports. See Table 1.
Table 1. Building data requirements and associated data sources for Irish case study.
Data Type Case Study Data Source Publisher
Building Stock Irish EPC (BER) Database [53] SEAI
Geographic data GeoDirectory [54], [55] An Post/ Ordnance Survey Ireland
Census Irish Cenus database [56] Central Statistics Office
Weather Dublin EPW File [45] EnergyPlus and Meteonorm
Energy policymakers' Reports Irish Climate Action Plan [57] Government of Ireland
In Ireland, building stock data are available as Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) maintained by the
Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland (SEAI). The EPC (also called the Building Energy Rating (BER)
certificate) dataset of the Irish residential stock represents the measured building stock and comprises more
than 200 building characteristics. These features include building fabric, heating systems, estimated end-
use, CO2 emissions, and estimated delivered and primary energy consumption. Each entry in the Irish EPC
dataset contains an energy rating for the respective building, ranked its energy performance on a graded
scale from A1 to G based on the estimated energy consumption per square meter per year [53]. In 2023, the
Irish EPC dataset contained approximately 1,126,817 residential buildings, with a significant proportion of
building ratings within the range of C1 to D2 (Fig. 5). The dataset's most common types of buildings are
semi-detached and detached houses.

Fig. 5. Irish EPC building energy rating chart used to determine building energy performance, percentage of
total EPC vs. Non-EPC residential buildings.
The Irish census, conducted every four years by the Central Statistics Office (CSO), collects various data
points on the building where the respondent resides. Therefore, the census provides the number of
buildings in each geographic area [56]. According to the CSO 2022 dataset, Ireland has approximately
1,841,152 residential buildings. Similarly, the GeoDirectory database provides statistical and geographical
information on Ireland's entire building stock [54]. The Q4 2022 GeoDirectory report, published by An Post
(Irish Postal Service) and Ordnance Survey Ireland, comprises geocoded addresses of 2,100,905 residential
buildings in Ireland. Detached dwellings remained the most prevalent type of residence (30.7% of the
national total), followed by terraced dwellings (28.2%) and semi-detached dwellings (24.7%). This study
focuses on Dublin City in Ireland and the Dublin EPC dataset, which includes 339,494 of the 624,758
residential buildings, representing the highest proportion of the entire Irish building stock. This suggests
that EPC data are available for only approximately 54% of the residential building stock of Dublin City ([53]).
This study employs machine learning algorithms to predict the energy rating of the remaining 46% stock
using limited variables (Fig. 5). Furthermore, the weather data for Dublin are obtained from the default
EnergyPlus dataset, which includes historical data and also incorporates future weather files for 2030 by
Meteonorm. This allows us to assess the impact of weather conditions on retrofit measures in various
climate scenarios.
Similarly, energy policy reports are necessary to explore future scenarios. Irish national reports, such as the
Climate Action Plan 2023, are used to test scenarios in this case study. This provides valuable insight into
future plans and strategies for Irish residential buildings. These reports outline the goals, roadmaps, and
goals set by policymakers to address climate change, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and improve energy
efficiency in the residential sector [57].
4.2. Building archetypes development

The parametric simulation framework uses each building archetype as a baseline model. In this case study,
four building types are considered as archetypes of the Irish residential building stock [44]. These types are
selected to represent the primary variations of building types based on data from the CSO, Irish EPC, and
GeoDirectory datasets. These building archetypes serve as the starting point for the parametric modeling of
different buildings, helping to develop a synthetic stock representation. These four different types of
residential buildings also exist in the GeoDirectory database, namely terraced houses, detached houses,
semi-detached houses, and bungalows (Fig. 6).

Fig. 6. 3D geometry of Irish residential building archetypes for energy parametric simulation [44], [48].
Building archetypes require both geometric and non-geometric data to model each baseline model. The
initial step involves identifying the non-geometric and geometric parameters associated with the existing
building stock of Dublin. This information is essential for performing a parametric simulation using the
archetypes. Geometric information collected from various types of Irish buildings is based on existing
studies and Irish building regulations guidelines. However, non-geometric parameters are determined using
current building energy performance databases and literature surveys. For example, the Irish EPC provides
values for essential building physics parameters, such as U-values for walls, roofs, floors, and windows,
along with their respective ranges. Other relevant non-geometric parameters that impact the energy
performance of the Irish building stock have been identified based on previous research [44], [48]. The
geometric and non-geometric parameters of baseline archetypes with default values used for the Irish case
study are shown in Table 2 [44], [48], [62], [63].
Table 2. Geometric and non-geometric parameters of baseline archetypes used in the Irish case study.
Geometric Parameters (Default Model Values)
Parameters Unit Terraced Detached Semi-detached Bungalow
Total Floor Area m2 91.66 130.81 107.69 85.91
Net Conditioned Area m2 91.66 130.81 107.69 85.91
Gross Roof Area m2 65.66 115.68 81.76 130.43
Window to Wall Ratio on NWSE facades % 0.4/0/0.4/0 0/0.5./0/0.5 0.4/0/0.4/0 0.4/0/0.4/0
Number of Stories (Height 2.7 meters) Numeric 2 2 2 1
Number of Zone Numeric 10 13 10 8
Orientation degree 0 90 0 0
Non-GeometricParameters (Default Model Values)
Wall U-value W/m2 K 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Window U-value W/m2 K 3 3 3 3
Floor U-value W/m2 K 0.5 0.58 0.5 0.58
Roof U-value W/m2 K 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33
Door U-value W/m2 K 2.041 2.041 2.041 2.041
Lighting Density W/m2 2.92 2.95 2.92 3.025
Occupancy Person 3 4 3 4
Equipment Density W/m2 1.47 1.61 1.47 1.56
Heating setpoint °C 21 21 21 21
Heating setback °C 12 12 12 12
HVAC Efficiency/ COP Numeric 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
DHW l/m2/day 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
ACH Numeric 0.94 0.87 0.94 0.74
Renewables W 2400 2400 2400 2400
4.3. Parametric simulation

The selection of parametric features is pivotal in developing physics-based models based on parametric
simulation and generating synthetic datasets after the archetype development process. The accuracy of the
building energy model relies on the careful selection of each input and output parameter in this process.
These parameter values embody the necessary variations for synthetic data generation. In this study, 19
input parameters are used to simulate Irish residential building archetypes. The selection of these
parameters is based on existing studies on residential buildings [48], [3]. However, these previous studies
do not include certain advanced features. Therefore, several additional parameters, including HVAC systems,
are incorporated to conduct a complete analysis of HVAC systems, primary heating factors, and renewable
parameters (Table 3). Furthermore, this study employed a building feature reduction approach by
integrating Design-Builder construction templates and reducing the number of dependent features. For
instance, building elements require material features such as thickness, conductivity, density, and specific
heat. In this study, existing templates were used, and U-values were used to represent these features. This
approach ultimately results in a reduction of the required parameters as inputs to the UBEM and further
reduces the model computing time by eliminating dependent parameters.
Table 3. Parameters needed for parametric simulation of archetypes.
No Parameters Unit Minimum Maximum Source
P1 Building type Categorical Semi Detached, Detached, House, [53]

Terrace, Bungalow
P2 Location Categorical Dublin [56]
P3 Weather Categorical Historical, 2030 EPW
P4 Wall U-value W/m2 K 0.09 2.4 [48], [58]
P5 Window U-value W/m2 K 0.73 5.7 [48], [58]
P6 Floor U-value W/m2 K 0.15 1.23 [48], [58]
P7 Roof U-value W/m2 K 0.07 2.3 [48], [58]
P8 Door U-value W/m2 K 0.81 5.9 [48], [58]
P9 Orientation degree 0 315 [48], [58]
P10 Lighting density W/m2 1 9 [48], [58]
P11 Occupancy Person 1 6 [56]
P12 Equipment density W/m2 1 21 [48], [58]
P13 Heating setpoint °C 18 23 [48], [58]
P14 Heating setback °C 10 14 [48], [58]
P15 HVAC efficiency or COP 0.45 to 4 0.3 4.5 [53]
P16 Domestic hot water l/m2/day 0.5 3.5 [48], [58]
P17 Air changes per hour Numeric 0.35 3 [59], [53]
P18 Window-to-wall ratio % 30 70 [48], [58]
P19 Renewables W Yes/No [53]
One of the primary output parameters in this study is the Energy Use Intensity (EUI), also referred to as the
final primary energy use per building's total floor area per year, measured in kW h/(m2*year). Irish EPC data
provide information on building energy performance or certificate ratings in terms of EUI (kW h/(m2*year)),
which is further interpreted on an A1 to G rating scale. An A1-rated building demonstrates the highest level
of energy efficiency, typically associated with the lowest energy consumption and CO2 emissions. On the
other hand, a building with a G rating represents the least energy-efficient rating (Fig. 5). Furthermore, this
study focuses on the end-use demand segregation method to calculate the Energy Use Intensity. Therefore,
each end-use demand, including heating, lighting, equipment, photovoltaic, and hot water, is considered an
output parameter in the parameter simulation process.
This study employs jEPlus as a parametric tool for physics-based parametric simulation. A jEPlus uses the
capabilities of EnergyPlus for thermal simulation and integrates DesignBuilder construction templates to
incorporate diverse parameter values. A sample of 1 million buildings is generated using the Latin
hypercube sampling (LHS) method to construct a reliable machine learning model. This sampling process
ensures that the resulting distribution covers all energy rating data for Irish buildings (Fig. 7).

Fig. 7. Distribution of 1 million residential buildings synthetic data in terms of the Irish building energy
rating labels.
4.4. Machine learning modeling

This process involves formulating an urban-scale building energy performance machine learning model. The
process begins with generated synthetic building stock data from the previous step, which are preprocessed
to remove outliers and improve the data set's quality before implementing machine learning models.
Subsequently, the data is divided into two subsets to create training and testing datasets. This study uses a
10-fold cross-validation method during data division to mitigate the risk of overfitting, rather than using a
random data selection for training and testing.
Ten different machine learning algorithms are analyzed to assess their abilities to predict EUI building
energy performance based on a given dataset. These regression algorithms have shown exceptional
performance in energy forecasting and prediction, particularly within the context of energy modeling ([17],
[11], [7]). The algorithms include XGBoost (XGB), LightGBM (LGBM), Gradient Boosting (GB), Histogram-
based Gradient Boosting (HGB), Random Forest (RF), Neural Network (NN), Decision Tree (DT), Linear
Regression (LR), K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN) and Support Vector Machine (SVM). The performance of each
developed model is evaluated using metrics such as R-Squared ( ), Mean Absolute Error (MAE), and Root
Mean Squared Error (RMSE). A model is considered superior if it achieves values closer to zero for RMSE and
MAE and values close to zero for . The target feature is EUI, which is used to predict building energy
performance using regression models. Furthermore, the final predicted EUI is also converted into an energy
rating based on the Irish EPC rating (Fig. 5). Finally, the model's performance is further tested using an
accuracy estimation of the energy rating, with the model producing the highest accuracy being considered
the best learning model.
This study conducts a comparative analysis of three different machine learning models proposed in this
research to evaluate which one is best suited for predicting building energy performance. These approaches
include the single-model approach (non-segregation method), the end-use demand segregation method,
and the ensemble-based segregation method. In the non-segregation method, EUI predicted using all ten
machine learning models. Similarly, the workflow then develops learning models using the segregation
method for each end-use demand, such as heating, interior lighting, photovoltaic power and water systems
in the interior equipment. The process implemented and tested ten machine learning models for each end-
use demand (Table 4). The results show that the XGB model showed the best performance in predicting the
demand for heating with an RMSE of 683.17. For interior lighting, interior equipment, photovoltaic power
and water systems, the XGB, LGBM, RF and DT models reported an RMSE of 0, indicating excellent
performance.
Table 4. Comparative analysis of machine learning models to predict end-use demand in kW h/yr using RMSE
metrics.
Models Heating Interior Lighting Interior Equipment Photovoltaic Power Water Systems
XGB 683.17 0 0 0.02 0
LGBM 801.69 0 0 0 0
HGB 1256.58 0.02 0.06 0.06 0.21
GB 2809.86 67.72 193.83 16 13.56
RF 1613.23 0 0 0 0
NN 3400.93 1.01 18.94 6.85 16.78
DT 2430.7 0 0 0 0
LR 5162.23 181.24 546.94 172.78 6440.26
KNN 5106.97 175.26 483.64 310.06 5629.45
SVM 7330.98 192.2 575.37 175.56 7976.76
In addition, models such as LR, KNN, and SVM exhibited relatively higher root mean square errors (RMSE) in
all categories, indicating less accurate predictions. The results demonstrate that the RMSE for most end-use
demands is nearly 0. This can be attributed to the fact that end-use demands calculated in EnergyPlus are
derived using static calculations, meaning that values are determined based on fixed parameters and
equations without accounting for variability or randomness. Therefore, machine learning models can easily
learn and map these fixed relationships between input features and end-use demands, resulting in a near-
perfect fit to the data. Furthermore, the SHAP method is employed to gain further insight into the main
features that affect the model output (Table 5). The findings reveal significant factors that affect energy
consumption in buildings. The rate of air changes per hour emerged as the most influential feature,
highlighting the importance of ventilation in determining heating demand. The heating setpoint and wall
U-value also ranked high, underscoring the importance of temperature control and insulation in regulating
energy usage. The type of building appeared consistently throughout the ranking, indicating its substantial
influence on overall energy demand and usage patterns. The relevance of orientation and weather in
photovoltaic power generation emphasizes the need to consider building direction for optimal energy
production. These results provide valuable information for stakeholders to understand these critical features
and design effective strategies aimed at reducing energy consumption, improving energy efficiency, and
promoting sustainability in the built environment.
Table 5. List of important features with rank that affect end-use demand machine learning models using
SHAP method.
Rank Heating Lighting Equipment Photovoltaic Water Systems
1 Air changes per hour Lighting density Equipment density Renewables Building type
2 Heating setpoint Building type Building type Orientation Domestic hot water
3 Wall U-value Weather
4 Building type
5 Occupancy
6 Window U-value
7 Equipment density
8 Weather
9 Roof U-value
10 Lighting density
11 Heating setback
12 Floor U-value
Finally, the prediction of each end-use demand is multiplied by its respective Irish primary energy factor,
and these values are then summed to determine the total energy consumption of the building. This
cumulative total is then divided by the area of the building to calculate the EUI, a measure of the energy
performance of the building. The results illustrate the significant improvement in the performance of
various machine learning models in predicting EUI with and without applying segregation methods (Fig. 8).
Firstly, non-segregation scenario, the XGB model demonstrates the best performance on all metrics,
boasting an RMSE of 13.89, MAE of 9.72, and an accuracy of 76% in terms of building rating. LGBM follows
closely in performance. However, as we move down the table, the performance degrades, with the SVM
having an RMSE of 71.96, MAE of 50.98, R-squared of 0.76 and accuracy of 29%. This suggests that the
Gradient Boosts models, such as XGB and LGBM, are better suited for this problem of non-segregation.

Fig. 8. Comparative analysis RMSE and accuracy of machine learning models using with and without end-
use demand segregation method to predict EUI.
Secondly, when considering the EUI Segregation scenario, there is a notable enhancement in the
performance of several models. Specifically, the XGB and LGBM models excel with good R-squared values
and substantially lower RMSE and MAE values compared to those without the segregation method. These
models achieve substantially higher accuracy, with XGB reaching 89% and LGBM reaching 87%. This signifies
that segregation could efficiently capture the underlying data patterns, aiding these models in making more
precise predictions. However, it is essential to note that some models, such as NN, LR, KNN, and SVM,
continue to demonstrate suboptimal performance even in the segregation scenario. The Neural Network
(NN) model shows relatively less improvement compared to other models, which might suggest that it does
not benefit as much from segregation in this particular context. The poor performance of SVM persisted
even with segregation, indicating that this model might not be suitable for this dataset irrespective of the
data processing method.
These results indicate that incorporating segregation in the analysis improves the performance of most
models, particularly XGB, LGBM, and HGB. These findings highlight the importance of considering
segregation in the machine learning process to obtain more accurate predictions for EUI values and
emphasize the potential for future research to explore novel approaches to improve the performance of
models that are lagging.
The modeling process is further improved using ensemble learning techniques to combine the best-
developed models (XGB, LGBM, and HGB) based on performance. By comparing the interpretation of these
models, this study seeks to identify the most effective approach for predicting building energy performance
using machine learning techniques.
These results highlight the importance of EUI segregation and the effectiveness of ensemble modeling in
improving the accuracy of end-use demand prediction (Table 6). In general, non-segregation method, the
XGB model achieved an RMSE of 13.89, with an accuracy of 76%. On the contrary, the XGB model
segregation method results in a significantly lower RMSE of 7.69, indicating reduced prediction errors
compared to the previous method. The accuracy improves to 89%, suggesting more accurate predictions in
most cases. Finally, the ensemble-based segregation approach, combining the XGB, LGBM, and HGB models,
achieves the lowest RMSE of 6.48, demonstrating a further reduction in prediction errors compared to the
previous methods. Accuracy reaches 91%, indicating a higher level of correct predictions than the other
methods. The confusion matrix shows that the model performs well with all energy ratings of the building
(Fig. 9). The findings suggest that the combination of models can enhance prediction capabilities and
provide more reliable estimates for decision-making processes.
Table 6. Comparative analysis of method and machine learning models for predicting EUI using model
performance metrics.
Methods Models RMSE MAE R-squared Accuracy
Non-Segregation XGB 13.89 9.72 0.99 76%
Segregation XGB 7.69 4.67 1 89%
Ensemble Segregation XGB, LGBM, HGB 6.48 3.9 1 91%

Fig. 9. Confusion matrix shows the performance of the ensemble-based segregation model for each building
rating. (For interpretation of the colors in the figure(s), the reader is referred to the web version of this
article.)
4.5. Urban building energy performance analysis

In the urban building energy performance analysis phase, the developed model is applied to practical
application scenarios, implementing retrofit measures outlined in Ireland's National Climate Action Plan
2023. The objective is to retrofit existing residential buildings with below B2 ratings and install heat pumps.
Two different scenarios are developed, improving the U values of windows, walls and roofs as
recommended by Part L of the Irish Building Regulations and upgrading the HVAC system from a boiler to a
heat pump. Additionally, the scenarios include options with and without renewables (Table 7).
Table 7. Retrofit scenarios to analyze the pre or post-effect on building energy performance at urban scale.
Retrofit Scenarios Window U-value Wall U-value Roof U-value HVAC Renewables
Scenario I 1.4 0.21 0.16 Heat Pump No
Scenario II 1.4 0.21 0.16 Heat Pump Yes
Both retrofit scenarios are applied to a dataset of 10,000 buildings with ratings below B2 and boilers as the
HVAC system. This dataset size of 10,000 buildings allows for a sufficiently large sample to analyze and
apply retrofit scenarios effectively, covering all inefficient building ratings from B3 to G. In general, there is a
significant improvement in the distribution of energy ratings in buildings. Furthermore, implementing both
retrofit scenarios in sample buildings resulted in a notable improvement, as indicated by the change in the
distribution curve from lower energy ratings to higher ones (Fig. 10). However, the results indicate that in
Scenario I, where the heat pumps are installed with windows, walls, and roofs refurbished, only 2,725
buildings achieved a rating of B2 and above.

Fig. 10. Impact on the distribution of 10,000 building sample pre or post-retrofit scenarios.
In contrast, Scenario II, which included renewable installations, showed a slight improvement, with 3,467
buildings reaching higher ratings. These results demonstrate that both scenarios could only improve the
higher rating of a relatively small percentage of buildings, ranging from 27% to 34%. It highlights the need
for deeper retrofitting measures to achieve higher ratings, including heat pumps and renewables (Fig. 10).
The results are further examined using historical and future weather conditions, utilizing a 2030-year
weather file. The emission scenarios considered in this study are based on a Representative Concentration
Pathway (RCP), which is a greenhouse gas concentration trajectory adopted by the IPCC [60]. The 2030
weather file is based on RCP 4.5, described by the IPCC as an intermediate scenario and the most probable
baseline scenario, considering the exhaustible nature of non-renewable fuels. The study shows no
significant differences when using the future weather file. However, due to global warming and projected
average temperature increases of 1–1.6 °C, heating demand is expected to decrease in the future, potentially
leading to an improvement in building energy ratings [61]. Furthermore, the rating distribution for
buildings is expected to change, primarily through using photovoltaics as renewable energy sources (Fig.
11).

Fig. 11. Impact of historical and future weather conditions on the post-retrofit scenarios.
The results demonstrate that the proposed methodology helps urban planners, energy policymakers, utility
planners, and manufacturers in evaluating the implementation of retrofit measures on a large scale.
Additionally, this case study highlights that fabric renovation in buildings is insufficient as a standalone
solution. In conjunction with the installation of the heat pump, it is crucial to address other factors such as
the airtightness of the building and the control of the heating to effectively improve the energy
performance of the building, as evidenced by the importance of the characteristics.
5. Discussion
The proposed data-driven methodology offers a potential solution by enabling the analysis of the energy
performance of residential buildings on a large scale, facilitating the decision-making process. The
methodology uses limited available data to generate a synthetic dataset of 1 million buildings. This dataset
is then used to develop a machine-learning model explicitly designed for the urban context. However, the
data required to implement the proposed methodology, such as building geometry and non-geometry data,
census information, and weather data, originate from various sources and come in different formats, leading
to data inconsistencies. Consequently, due to these inconsistencies and the absence of standardized urban-
scale data, available data present a significant and ongoing barrier to accurately implementing urban-scale
modeling. The developed model allows for the prediction of various retrofit scenarios, even with limited
resources. Segregation and ensemble-based methods improve the overall performance of the model,
resulting in a significant 15% improvement. However, it is essential to note that the accuracy and
implementation of the model depend on the quality and availability of input data and may vary in different
contexts and countries. Moreover, developing synthetic data for different building archetypes in other
contexts might require additional computational time.
Furthermore, the study identifies the key characteristics that influence the building demand for end-use.
This finding enables policymakers to prioritize these influential features when considering retrofit
measures. By focusing on these critical factors, policymakers can effectively allocate resources and
implement targeted retrofit strategies to improve building energy efficiency. However, it should be
acknowledged that the importance of characteristics may differ for different sample data, weather
conditions, or urban contexts.
Finally, the proposed solution is a valuable tool for urban planners, energy policymakers, utility planners,
and manufacturers in evaluating and implementing retrofit scenarios at the urban scale. However, the
models inherently depend on the quality of the data input. Therefore, incorrect synthetic data that do not
closely represent real-world conditions might not accurately capture the complexities and uncertainties of
the actual urban context. Furthermore, machine learning models are often considered ‘black boxes,’ which
could lead to a lack of understanding of the underlying reasons behind the predictions. This lack of
knowledge makes it difficult for policymakers and planners to trust and fully understand the
recommendations. Additionally, the complexity and computational requirements of machine learning
models and parametric simulations can be prohibitive, necessitating significant computational resources.
6. Conclusion and future work

Stakeholders analyze the energy performance of buildings on an urban scale to develop effective policy
measures that reduce energy consumption and CO2 emissions. However, collecting and analyzing building
energy performance data on a large scale is complex and time-consuming, requiring multiple resources. To
address this challenge, we propose a novel methodology that uses machine learning algorithms to predict
the energy performance of an entire urban building stock. This methodology allows stakeholders to make
informed decisions and implement targeted interventions to promote sustainable urban development. In
this paper, we implement the end-use demand segregation method and the ensemble-based approach to
develop a robust learning model to predict building energy performance. This approach improves the
predictive performance of machine learning and supports informed decision-making in building energy
performance assessment.
The methodology tested on Dublin City by developing a synthetic building dataset of 1 million residential
buildings using parametric analysis of 19 key parameters identified from four building archetypes. The
results show that the segregation method is highly effective for predicting EUI based on the given dataset,
compared to the traditional single model approach. Among the ten different machine learning algorithms
compared, variations of the Gradient Boosting algorithm (XGB, LGBM, and HGB) are found to be the most
efficient and accurate models to predict building energy performance. Furthermore, the ensemble-based
approach further improved the results, achieving an accuracy of 91%. Comparing the ten different models
revealed that the ensemble-based segregation method is highly effective in predicting EUI, with an
improvement in the energy rating of the building resulting in an increase in accuracy 15%. Accurate
prediction of building energy performance enables stakeholders, such as energy policymakers and urban
planners, to make informed decisions when planning large-scale retrofit measures.
In general, the proposed methodology offers valuable information and tools to support urban planners and
energy policymakers in addressing the challenges of sustainable planning and energy efficiency on an urban
scale. The data-driven approach, coupled with feature analysis and predictive modeling, empowers
decision-makers to make informed choices and drive positive change in urban energy systems. The findings
of this study offer valuable assistance to energy policymakers and urban planners by providing information
that can contribute to the development of effective retrofit measures. These measures aim to decrease
building energy consumption and mitigate carbon emissions. By incorporating the knowledge gained from
this study, policymakers and planners can make well-informed decisions that facilitate sustainable urban
development and address the pressing issue of climate change. Furthermore, the study helps policymakers
and urban planners evaluate the feasibility and impact of implementing retrofit measures on a larger scale.
This comprehensive approach supports the formulation and execution of strategies to address energy
efficiency and environmental concerns.
Future research directions could investigate the influence of different mid-rise or high-rise apartments and
non-residential archetype models on the predictive performance of machine learning algorithms.
Furthermore, the integration of cloud computing parametric simulation could further enhance the research
results. Currently, this research focuses on annual energy use and could be expanded to analyze seasonal
and monthly variations.
Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that
could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This publication has emanated from research supported by Science Foundation Ireland through US-Ireland
R&D Partnership Research Grant 20/US/3695, the U.S. National Science Foundation through Award Number
2217410, and the Department for the Economy in Northern Ireland through USI 167. The opinions, findings,
and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not
necessarily reflect the views of the Science Foundation Ireland or other funding agencies.
Recommended articles
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
References
[1] EU-Energy
Energy for Europe by European commission
Online
https://energy.ec.europa.eu/index_en (2022), Accessed 1st Dec 2022
Google Scholar
[2] W.A. Benjamin

Revision of the energy performance of buildings directive: fit for 55 package
(2022)
Google Scholar
[3] U. Ali, M.H. Shamsi, M. Bohacek, C. Hoare, K. Purcell, E. Mangina, J. O'Donnell

A data-driven approach to optimize urban scale energy retrofit decisions for residential
buildings
Appl. Energy, 267 (2020), Article 114861
View PDF View article View in Scopus Google Scholar
[4] C. Hoare, R. Aghamolaei, M. Lynch, A. Gaur, J. O'Donnell

A linked data approach to multi-scale energy modelling
Adv. Eng. Inform., 54 (2022), Article 101719
[5] C.F. Reinhart, C.C. Davila

Urban building energy modeling–a review of a nascent field
Build. Environ., 97 (2016), pp. 196-202
[6] T. Hong, Y. Chen, X. Luo, N. Luo, S.H. Lee

Ten questions on urban building energy modeling
Build. Environ., 168 (2020), Article 106508
[7] U. Ali, M.H. Shamsi, C. Hoare, E. Mangina, J. O'Donnell

Review of urban building energy modeling (UBEM) approaches, methods and tools using
qualitative and quantitative analysis
Energy Build., 246 (2021), Article 111073
[8] T. Ahmad, H. Chen, Y. Guo, J. Wang

A comprehensive overview on the data driven and large scale based approaches for
forecasting of building energy demand: a review
Energy Build., 165 (2018), pp. 301-320
[9] Y. Zhao, C. Zhang, Y. Zhang, Z. Wang, J. Li

A review of data mining technologies in building energy systems: load prediction, pattern
identification, fault detection and diagnosis
Energy Built Environ., 1 (2) (2020), pp. 149-164
[10] Y. Wang, T. Wu, H. Li, M. Skitmore, B. Su

A statistics-based method to quantify residential energy consumption and stock at the city
level in China: the case of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay area cities
J. Clean. Prod., 251 (2020), Article 119637
[11] Y. Sun, F. Haghighat, B.C. Fung

A review of the-state-of-the-art in data-driven approaches for building energy prediction
[12] C. Tian, Y. Ye, Y. Lou, W. Zuo, G. Zhang, C. Li

Daily power demand prediction for buildings at a large scale using a hybrid of physics-
based model and generative adversarial network
Building Simulation, vol. 15, Springer (2022), pp. 1685-1701
CrossRef View in Scopus Google Scholar
[13] N. Abbasabadi, M. Ashayeri

Urban energy use modeling methods and tools; a review and an outlook for future tools
Build. Environ. (2019), Article 106270
[14] P. Manandhar, H. Rafiq, E. Rodriguez-Ubinas

Current status, challenges, and prospects of data-driven urban energy modeling: a review
of machine learning methods
Energy Rep., 9 (2023), pp. 2757-2776
[15] C. Benavente-Peces, N. Ibadah

Buildings energy efficiency analysis and classification using various machine learning
technique classifiers
Energies, 13 (13) (2020), p. 3497
[16] U. Ali, M.H. Shamsi, F. Alshehri, E. Mangina, J. O'Donnell

Comparative analysis of machine learning algorithms for building archetypes
development inurban building energy modeling
Building Performance Modeling Conference and SimBuild (2018)
Google Scholar
[17] Y. Chen, M. Guo, Z. Chen, Z. Chen, Y. Ji

Physical energy and data-driven models in building energy prediction: a review
Energy Rep., 8 (2022), pp. 2656-2671
[18] R. Olu-Ajayi, H. Alaka, I. Sulaimon, F. Sunmola, S. Ajayi

Building energy consumption prediction for residential buildings using deep learning and
other machine learning techniques
J. Build. Eng., 45 (2022), Article 103406

[19] Y. Pan, M. Zhu, Y. Lv, Y. Yang, Y. Liang, R. Yin, Y. Yang, X. Jia, X. Wang, F. Zeng, et al.
Building energy simulation and its application for building performance optimization: a
review of methods, tools, and case studies
Adv. Appl. Energy (2023), Article 100135
[20] M. Ferrando, F. Causone, T. Hong, Y. Chen

Urban building energy modeling (UBEM) tools: a state-of-the-art review of bottom-up
physics-based approaches
Sustain. Cities Soc., 62 (2020), Article 102408
[21] O. Pasichnyi, J. Wallin, O. Kordas

Data-driven building archetypes for urban building energy modelling
Energy, 181 (2019), pp. 360-377
[22] L.G. Swan, V.I. Ugursal

Modeling of end-use energy consumption in the residential sector: a review of modeling
techniques
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 13 (8) (2009), pp. 1819-1835
[23] T. Hong, Y. Chen, S.H. Lee, M.A. Piette

Citybes: a web-based platform to support city-scale building energy efficiency
Urban Comput., 14 (2016), p. 2016
Google Scholar
[24] Y. Chen, T. Hong, M.A. Piette

Automatic generation and simulation of urban building energy models based on city
datasets for city-scale building retrofit analysis
Appl. Energy, 205 (2017), pp. 323-335
[25] D. Robinson, F. Haldi, P. Leroux, D. Perez, A. Rasheed, U. Wilke

Citysim: comprehensive micro-simulation of resource flows for sustainable urban
planning
Proceedings of the Eleventh International IBPSA Conference, no. CONF (2009), pp. 1083-1090
View in Scopus Google Scholar
[26] C. Reinhart, T. Dogan, J.A. Jakubiec, T. Rakha, A. Sang
Umi-an urban simulation environment for building energy use, daylighting and
walkability
13th Conference of International Building Performance Simulation Association, Chambery, France (2013)
Google Scholar
[27] C.C. Davila, C.F. Reinhart, J.L. Bemis

Modeling Boston: a workflow for the efficient generation and maintenance of urban
building energy models from existing geospatial datasets
Energy, 117 (2016), pp. 237-250
Google Scholar
[28] R. El Kontar, B. Polly, T. Charan, K. Fleming, N. Moore, N. Long, D. Goldwasser

Urbanopt: an open-source software development kit for community and urban district
energy modeling
Tech. rep.
National Renewable Energy Lab. (NREL), Golden, CO (United States) (2020)
Google Scholar
[29] Y.Q. Ang, Z.M. Berzolla, S. Letellier-Duchesne, V. Jusiega, C. Reinhart

Ubem. io: a web-based framework to rapidly generate urban building energy models for
carbon reduction technology pathways
Sustain. Cities Soc., 77 (2022), Article 103534
[30] S.S. Abolhassani, M. Amayri, N. Bouguila, U. Eicker

A new workflow for detailed urban scale building energy modeling using spatial joining of
attributes for archetype selection
[31] A. Katal, M. Mortezazadeh, L.L. Wang, H. Yu

Urban building energy and microclimate modeling–from 3d city generation to dynamic
simulations
Energy, 251 (2022), Article 123817
[32] I.M. Borràs, D. Neves, R. Gomes

Using urban building energy modeling data to assess energy communities' potential
Google Scholar
[33] A. Nutkiewicz, Z. Yang, R.K. Jain

Data-driven urban energy simulation (due-s): integrating machine learning into an urban
building energy simulation workflow

Energy Proc., 142 (2017), pp. 2114-2119
[34] A. Rahman, V. Srikumar, A.D. Smith

Predicting electricity consumption for commercial and residential buildings using deep
recurrent neural networks
Appl. Energy, 212 (2018), pp. 372-385
[35] C.E. Kontokosta, C. Tull

A data-driven predictive model of city-scale energy use in buildings
Appl. Energy, 197 (2017), pp. 303-317
[36] F. Jiang, J. Ma, Z. Li, Y. Ding

Prediction of energy use intensity of urban buildings using the semi-supervised deep
learning model
Energy, 249 (2022), Article 123631
[37] Y. Zhang, B.K. Teoh, M. Wu, J. Chen, L. Zhang

Data-driven estimation of building energy consumption and ghg emissions using
explainable artificial intelligence
Energy, 262 (2023), Article 125468
[38] J. Seo, S. Kim, S. Lee, H. Jeong, T. Kim, J. Kim

Data-driven approach to predicting the energy performance of residential buildings using
minimal input data
Build. Environ., 214 (2022), Article 108911
[39] N.-T. Ngo, A.-D. Pham, T.T.H. Truong, N.-S. Truong, N.-T. Huynh, T.M. Pham
An ensemble machine learning model for enhancing the prediction accuracy of energy
consumption in buildings
Arab. J. Sci. Eng., 47 (4) (2022), pp. 4105-4117
[40] M. Wurm, A. Droin, T. Stark, C. Geiß, W. Sulzer, H. Taubenböck

Deep learning-based generation of building stock data from remote sensing for urban heat
demand modeling
ISPRS Int.l J. Geo-Inf., 10 (1) (2021), p. 23
[41] A.S. Mohammed, P.G. Asteris, M. Koopialipoor, D.E. Alexakis, M.E. Lemonis, D.J. Armaghani
Stacking ensemble tree models to predict energy performance in residential buildings
Sustainability, 13 (15) (2021), p. 8298
[42] F. Johari, G. Peronato, P. Sadeghian, X. Zhao, J. Widén

Urban building energy modeling: state of the art and future prospects
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 128 (2020), Article 109902
[43] T. Loga, B. Stein, N. Diefenbach

Tabula building typologies in 20 European countries—making energy-related features of
residential building stocks comparable
Energy Build., 132 (2016), pp. 4-12
[44] U. Ali, M.H. Shamsi, C. Hoare, E. Mangina, J. O'Donnell

A data-driven approach for multi-scale building archetypes development
[45] W. Wang, S. Li, S. Guo, M. Ma, S. Feng, L. Bao

Benchmarking urban local weather with long-term monitoring compared with weather
datasets from climate station and energyplus weather (EPW) data
Energy Rep., 7 (2021), pp. 6501-6514
[46] M.P. Tootkaboni, I. Ballarini, M. Zinzi, V. Corrado

A comparative analysis of different future weather data for building energy performance
simulation
Climate, 9 (2) (2021), p. 37
Google Scholar
[47] Y. Zhang, I. Korolija

Performing complex parametric simulations with jeplus
SET2010-9th International Conference on Sustainable Energy Technologies (2010), pp. 24-27
Google Scholar
[48] J. Egan, D. Finn, P.H.D. Soares, V.A.R. Baumann, R. Aghamolaei, P. Beagon, O. Neu, F. Pallonetto, J. O'Donnell
Definition of a useful minimal-set of accurately-specified input data for building energy
performance simulation
Energy Build., 165 (2018), pp. 172-183
[49] Y. Choi, D. Song, S. Yoon, J. Koo

Comparison of factorial and Latin hypercube sampling designs for meta-models of
building heating and cooling loads
Energies, 14 (2) (2021), p. 512
[50] W. Tian, Y. Heo, P. De Wilde, Z. Li, D. Yan, C.S. Park, X. Feng, G. Augenbroe
A review of uncertainty analysis in building energy assessment
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 93 (2018), pp. 285-301
[51] Y. Ye, M. Strong, Y. Lou, C.A. Faulkner, W. Zuo, S. Upadhyaya

Evaluating performance of different generative adversarial networks for large-scale
building power demand prediction
[52] D.H. Wolpert

Stacked generalization
Neural Netw., 5 (2) (1992), pp. 241-259
[53] Building energy rating certificate database by SEAI

Online
https://ndber.seai.ie/BERResearchTool/ber/search.aspx , Accessed 25th Oct 2023
Google Scholar
[54] K. McDonagh
Geodirectory technical guide, an post and ordnance survey Ireland
(2023)
Google Scholar
[55] Ordnance survey Ireland

Online
https://www.osi.ie , Accessed 25th Oct 2023
Google Scholar
[56] Census of population 2022 - profile 1 housing in Ireland by Central Statistics Office
Online
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cpsr/censusofpopulation2022-summaryresults/ (2022),
Accessed 25th Oct 2023
Google Scholar
[57] Ireland climate action plan 2023

Online
https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/7bd8c-climate-action-plan-2023/ , Accessed 25th Oct 2023
Google Scholar
[58] U. Ali, M.H. Shamsi, M. Bohacek, C. Hoare, K. Purcell, E. Mangina, J. O'Donnell

A data-driven approach to optimize urban scale energy retrofit decisions for residential
buildings
Appl. Energy, 267 (2020), Article 114861
[59] J. Laue
Ashrae 62.1: using the ventilation rate procedure
Consult.-Specif. Eng., 55 (2018), pp. 14-17
View in Scopus Google Scholar
[60] Intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC)

Online
https://www.ipcc.ch , Accessed 25th Oct 2023
Google Scholar
[61] P. Nolan, J. Flanagan

High-resolution climate projections for Ireland–a multi-model ensemble approach
Environmental Protection Agency (2020)
Google Scholar
[62] D. Sood, I. Alhindawi, U. Ali, J.A. McGrath, M.A. Byrne, D. Finn, J. O'Donnell
Simulation-based evaluation of occupancy on energy consumption of multi-scale
residential building archetypes
[63] D. Sood, I. Alhindawi, U. Ali, D. Finn, J.A. McGrath, M.A. Byrne, J. O'Donnell
Zone-wise occupancy schedules developed using Time Use Survey data for building
energy performance simulations
Data Brief, 49 (2023), Article 109453
Cited by (0)
© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
All content on this site: Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V., its licensors, and contributors. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar
technologies. For all open access content, the Creative Commons licensing terms apply.

Urban Building Energy Performance Prediction and Retrofit Analysis Using Data-Driven Machine Learning Approach - ScienceDirect

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Urban Building Energy Performance Prediction and Retrofit Analysis Using Data-Driven Machine Learning Approach - ScienceDirect

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Urban building energy performance prediction and retrofit analysis using data-driven machine learning approach - ScienceDirect 01.12.

Energy and Buildings

Urban building energy performance prediction and

Outline Share Cite

Under a Creative Commons license open access

• Implementation of an end-use demand segregation.

• Identification of key building features for each end-use demand prediction.

• Analysis of the impact of retrofit measures using future weather data.

Building Energy Performance Simulator

City Building Energy Saver

Dwelling Energy Assessment Procedure

European Union Energy Performance of Buildings Directive

Heating Ventilation, and Air Conditioning

Light Gradient Boosted Machine

Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland

Urban Building Energy Modeling

2.1. Physics-based urban building energy modeling

has research gaps, as discussed in the next section.

2.2. Data-driven urban building energy modeling

Download : Download high-res image (180KB)

3.1. Data collection

WeatherShift, and CCWorldWeatherGen [46].

3.2. Building archetypes development

3.3. Parametric simulation

3.4. Machine learning modeling

Download : Download high-res image (75KB)

3.4.1. Data preprocessing

3.4.2. Data splitting

3.4.3. Non-segregation models development

3.4.4. End-use demand segregation models development

where , , , , , and represent the energy consumption (or

Download : Download high-res image (110KB)

3.4.5. Ensemble and segregation models development

Download : Download high-res image (94KB)

3.4.6. Models performance

3.4.7. End-use features extraction

3.5. Urban building energy performance analysis

4.1. Data collection

Data Type Case Study Data Source Publisher

Building Stock Irish EPC (BER) Database [53] SEAI

Geographic data GeoDirectory [54], [55] An Post/ Ordnance Survey Ireland

Census Irish Cenus database [56] Central Statistics Office

Weather Dublin EPW File [45] EnergyPlus and Meteonorm

Download : Download high-res image (98KB)

4.2. Building archetypes development

Download : Download high-res image (207KB)

Geometric Parameters (Default Model Values)

Parameters Unit Terraced Detached Semi-detached Bungalow

Total Floor Area m2 91.66 130.81 107.69 85.91

Net Conditioned Area m2 91.66 130.81 107.69 85.91

Gross Roof Area m2 65.66 115.68 81.76 130.43

Window to Wall Ratio on NWSE facades % 0.4/0/0.4/0 0/0.5./0/0.5 0.4/0/0.4/0 0.4/0/0.4/0

Number of Stories (Height 2.7 meters) Numeric 2 2 2 1

Number of Zone Numeric 10 13 10 8

Non-GeometricParameters (Default Model Values)

Wall U-value W/m2 K 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

Window U-value W/m2 K 3 3 3 3

Floor U-value W/m2 K 0.5 0.58 0.5 0.58

Roof U-value W/m2 K 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33

Door U-value W/m2 K 2.041 2.041 2.041 2.041

Lighting Density W/m2 2.92 2.95 2.92 3.025

Equipment Density W/m2 1.47 1.61 1.47 1.56

HVAC Efficiency/ COP Numeric 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8